Slashdot Mirror

Ryan Kingsbury writes "The world's longest solar car race kicked off to a sunny start today in Chicago! The American Solar Challenge, which is only held every two years, runs 11 gruelling days along historic Route 66. Race updates can be found at the official site. One big surprise was that last year's winner (University of Michigan) didn't make it through prerace qualifications. This will certainly give some lower budget teams a chance at gold. Details of qualifications can be found here."

ShadowLight writes ""In December vast hordes of eager filmgoers will mob cineplexes across the land and witness, at the climax of The Two Towers, one of the most anticipated scenes in recent movie history: the great Battle of Helm's Deep." This article talks about the software, named Massive, used to create this 50,000 creature battle."

bigstripes sent us a couple of websites that game chairs: The RocknRide and the Simcraft for people for whom strapping a subwoofer to your chest just isn't enough. Curious what the MST3k guys are doing? bill notes that most of the guys are working on a website Timmy Bighands, although Joel is doing his own thing. QuasEye sent us a link to a review of The Matrix: The Musical. I need footage of this, but it sounds frightening beyond measure. Frank Martini pointed us to a VinylVideo who are hawking a kit that lets your old record player play video. Sun Tzu pointed us to a list of milestones in a programmers life, while jamesoutlaw sent in a site that caricatures common discussion group personalities in Usenet ... and surprisingly enough Many of the stereotypes apply just as well to Slashdot. Schmam notes that Stevie Case, one of the designers for Quake II, now working with Ion Storm, famous for being Romero's GF, and for beating him at Quake, as well as being hot ... well she's in playboy, but you're only allowed to read the article or else I'm telling your mom. Hey, its nice to note that Slashdot took 2 People's Voice Webby Awards one in the Print & Zines and the other in Community. I'm not exactly sure what it proves tho (besides the fact that you guys like us enough to fill out a form) but thanks to those who voted us. May peace and prosperity follow you (and may the Webbies not sell your e-mail address to people bent on selling you toner). And now for the strang(er) part of the quickies, HelLfiRe leads us towards The Stinkymeat Project which is, well, a photo documentary of a plate of rotting meat. Read only on a settled stomach. Richard Stevens sent us an Amazingly Strange cartoon strip: This guy draws inane pictures based on the idiotic titles people send him. If you want something slightly better drawn, mkoscica sent us plif which is really twisted, but funny.

Some useful stuff: An anonymous reader noted that AltaVista has opened Raging.Com which is a super fast minimal search engine without all that bloated portal crap. gi_wrighty noted that the winneers of the 5k HTML Contest have Been announced. Impressive minimalism. Soeren Staun-Pedersen noted that a new The Gimp User Group has come along. j1mmy pointed us to pictures of the new Lara Croft Model from E3. Yaruar sent us a story about Lego Filmsets that come with cameras for you do-it-yourselfers. If you don't want to make your own films, how about your own Mars Polar Lander Site? (Thanks Biff Studly). antiwesley sent us interesting insight into a typical geek cube. Speaking of things found in geek Cubes, BenTheDewpendent sent us a page that tracks tons of info on Mountain Dew and bob_jordan found pictures of upcoming Futurama Bender Action Figures (Not as cool as Nate's Picolo tho) Baloo Ursidae sent us a story about electricity generating shoes. Gorphrim sent us some Duron Parodies Finally some Slashdot references: DrFun (one of the original net comics) mentioned us in a recent strip, Someone noted that Geek Culture is selling First Post T-Shirts. QuasEye noted that someone registered hotgrits.org and ironically enough, is running Slashcode. And the WashPost ran an article on us which is mostly accurate. And to wrap things up, maxxon showed us the way to Crank Dot Net, which has stuff on all sorts of conspiracy theories and urban myths and other crazy stuffs on the net. Stuff like UFOs, the face on mars, Creationism, Scientology, antigravity, and perpetual motion and more.

Sit back and get jiggy with tonights Quickies: First up, jamiemccarthy sent us a Magic 8-Ball that claims to be operated by Legos. And if you're into those remote control legos, Paddy noted that there is new stuff on the lego website. Todays stranges item comes from Chris Henesy who sent us official NASA procedure for Viking Raids. Michael Van Vertloo sent us linkage to a webcam from the 6th floor of the Texas School Book Depositoryso you conspiracy theorists can keep an eye on it. Bogatyr noted that there now is actually a website selling stuff from the matrix. No, not the minigun, but sunglasses and stuff. tj2sent us linkage to an interview where George Lucas blaims the internet for Jar Jar sucking so badly. Mike sent us a page that tracks Strange things sold on ebay. Finally, markhb sent us a Washington Post profile of Marc Andreeson where he talks about assorted things, and even plugs Slashdot as one of his favorite sites (thanks Marc!) And finally, to bookend this Fresh block of quickies, harb sent us lyrics to the classic (cough) Will Smith Song "Men in Black" for Linux geeks.

||Plazm|| writes " Here's an interesting article on what's in the future for these two dev platforms. Maybe they can play nice after all... 'This past week, there has been an impressive show of cooperation between the KDE and GNOME projects involving prominent hackers from both camps. The initial subject of discussion was concerning a common network-connection manager that would enable applications to detect whether an internet connection was currently available or not; both projects had already been working on the issue including two independent efforts from KDE developers Bjoern Kahl and Matt Koss. The discussion diverged to the larger issue of making GNOME and KDE play nice together including related CORBA matters.' "

Brice Ruth has written a response to the lengthy debates sparked a few days ago on these pages regarding the new Internet Printer Protocol. He has a lot to say, and from an informed position. You should check this out if you're interested in the issue- a lot of good information seperating fact from fiction. Hit the link below to read it. The following was written by Slashdot reader Brice Ruth A Response to the IPP

I just got through browsing through all the comments posted about CNN's IPP story. I thought I'd send you my thoughts on the matter, since I believe I'm in a rather unique position to talk about IPP. From June, 1998 through the end of February, 1999, I worked with 3 other classmates on a Senior Project sponsored by Xerox Corporation, mapping the current IPP 1.0 specification into a distributed object model, using Xerox' Inter Language Unification (ILU) system, which is Xerox' Palo Alto Research Center's CORBA like system.

(Here comes the disclaimer), the views that I've represented here are my views, they do not represent the views of Xerox, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology, any members of the Printer Working Group, or any members of my Senior Project team.

Why is IPP better than lpr, HP Jet-Admin, or any of the currently available printer solutions?

In all the discussion, one major point, I believe, has been missed. One of the major goals of the IPP projects is to eliminate the client's need for printer drivers. lpr needs drivers, HP Jet-Admin needs drivers (besides only working w/ HP printers :)), NT/win98/95, MacOS -> they all need drivers to communicate with printers. What IPP allows for is a communication between the client and the printer (or printer server, the two do NOT have to be the same), where the printer informs the client of its capabilitie. The client can then present these capabilities to the user who can select which of the capabilities ought to be used in printing the document. However - this isn't *required* ... a print job can be constructed and 'validated' against the particular printer you want to use, and the client can simply inform the user if the printer is capable of printing the document with the settings you've previously selected. I could go into many more example situations where this printer/client communication can be extremely useful, however - suffice it to say that the language is extensible, so the sky is the limit, in this sense.

What about security?

Whenever we hear about something being 'at large' on the Internet - security concerns are raised. Let me express my faith in the members of the Printer Working Group. I've personally met many of the individuals involved with developing the IPP specification and I've actually *read* the IPP specification (many, many, many times). The security that is built into this system, this *open standard* system, is very much better than anything we have now. And if there's a system out there that has BETTER security, please - contribute your knowledge to the standard, don't sit and whine about how IPP is going to be insecure and open to attacks. Any online system is open to attacks, just because a system exists. This doesn't mean the system ought to be rejected/abolished ... if this were our modus operandi, then we would close down the Internet, close down the phone systems, close down our utilities. All systems that are in use today are open to attack, in varying degrees. Security means limiting the degree to which a system is vulnerable to attack. Perfect security costs an infinite amount of $$ and is not feasible.

Is everything CNN said true?

Well, no - not exactly. Microsoft does not hold the key to the success of IPP - you do. We face a problem these days of trying to get another person to visualize what we've created, without being physically present to show them. The fact that we will be able to FAX in color isn't the *only* thing that IPP will allow us to do. Think about how FAXing (the *primary* means of communication for many large corporations) takes place today. Your FAX number is on your business card ... so, someone needs to send you some information ... your FAX number is busy, so they try again ... still busy. As some phone company commercials have touted, you're potentially losing business. Then ... how many times have you received an illegible FAX? I have. How many times has a FAX been misplaced on its way from the company FAX machine to your inbox? IPP is a new player in the field of communication that is an effort to address some of these major problems.

Imagine the following situation (which I've attempted to make somewhat realistic): you're an advertisement/marketing firm with a new layout for a magazine spread, for company X. As is always the case, the more time you have to work on this spread, the better it will be. Working up to the deadline is almost a certainty in the fast paced business world. If company X, your client, needs this spread for their board meeting this evening. It is too late to send color printouts of the new layout via Federal Express. Currently, your only recourse is to send a FAX or to attempt to negotiate a document format that your client understands and that doesn't lose any of the layout that your expensive graphics software allows for (Pagemill, Illustrator, Corel?). Enter IPP. Your client contact simply gives you the url of a printer that is capable of printing your layout in acceptable quality, as well as the username & password to access the resource, OR, the client sends you the url of the high quality, high capacity color printer at the Kinko's across the street. Problem solved. Notice that you don't need to (a) know what kind of printer is printing your layout, only the capabilities of the printer are important. Also, (b) you didn't need to download drivers for the printer that you are using. These are *very* important useability issues.

All these things that I've tried to visualize for the readers of Slashdot represent only a fraction of the possibilities that IPP allows for.

I encourage you to read the IPP Model document as well as the Specifications and Implementers Guide for IPP.

If you'd like more information on my Senior project, feel free to visit this page.

Brice Ruth has written a response to the lengthy debates sparked a few days ago on these pages regarding the new Internet Printer Protocol. He has a lot to say, and from an informed position. You should check this out if you're interested in the issue- a lot of good information seperating fact from fiction. Hit the link below to read it. The following was written by Slashdot reader Brice Ruth A Response to the IPP

I just got through browsing through all the comments posted about CNN's IPP story. I thought I'd send you my thoughts on the matter, since I believe I'm in a rather unique position to talk about IPP. From June, 1998 through the end of February, 1999, I worked with 3 other classmates on a Senior Project sponsored by Xerox Corporation, mapping the current IPP 1.0 specification into a distributed object model, using Xerox' Inter Language Unification (ILU) system, which is Xerox' Palo Alto Research Center's CORBA like system.

(Here comes the disclaimer), the views that I've represented here are my views, they do not represent the views of Xerox, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology, any members of the Printer Working Group, or any members of my Senior Project team.

Why is IPP better than lpr, HP Jet-Admin, or any of the currently available printer solutions?

In all the discussion, one major point, I believe, has been missed. One of the major goals of the IPP projects is to eliminate the client's need for printer drivers. lpr needs drivers, HP Jet-Admin needs drivers (besides only working w/ HP printers :)), NT/win98/95, MacOS -> they all need drivers to communicate with printers. What IPP allows for is a communication between the client and the printer (or printer server, the two do NOT have to be the same), where the printer informs the client of its capabilitie. The client can then present these capabilities to the user who can select which of the capabilities ought to be used in printing the document. However - this isn't *required* ... a print job can be constructed and 'validated' against the particular printer you want to use, and the client can simply inform the user if the printer is capable of printing the document with the settings you've previously selected. I could go into many more example situations where this printer/client communication can be extremely useful, however - suffice it to say that the language is extensible, so the sky is the limit, in this sense.

What about security?

Whenever we hear about something being 'at large' on the Internet - security concerns are raised. Let me express my faith in the members of the Printer Working Group. I've personally met many of the individuals involved with developing the IPP specification and I've actually *read* the IPP specification (many, many, many times). The security that is built into this system, this *open standard* system, is very much better than anything we have now. And if there's a system out there that has BETTER security, please - contribute your knowledge to the standard, don't sit and whine about how IPP is going to be insecure and open to attacks. Any online system is open to attacks, just because a system exists. This doesn't mean the system ought to be rejected/abolished ... if this were our modus operandi, then we would close down the Internet, close down the phone systems, close down our utilities. All systems that are in use today are open to attack, in varying degrees. Security means limiting the degree to which a system is vulnerable to attack. Perfect security costs an infinite amount of $$ and is not feasible.

Is everything CNN said true?

Well, no - not exactly. Microsoft does not hold the key to the success of IPP - you do. We face a problem these days of trying to get another person to visualize what we've created, without being physically present to show them. The fact that we will be able to FAX in color isn't the *only* thing that IPP will allow us to do. Think about how FAXing (the *primary* means of communication for many large corporations) takes place today. Your FAX number is on your business card ... so, someone needs to send you some information ... your FAX number is busy, so they try again ... still busy. As some phone company commercials have touted, you're potentially losing business. Then ... how many times have you received an illegible FAX? I have. How many times has a FAX been misplaced on its way from the company FAX machine to your inbox? IPP is a new player in the field of communication that is an effort to address some of these major problems.

Imagine the following situation (which I've attempted to make somewhat realistic): you're an advertisement/marketing firm with a new layout for a magazine spread, for company X. As is always the case, the more time you have to work on this spread, the better it will be. Working up to the deadline is almost a certainty in the fast paced business world. If company X, your client, needs this spread for their board meeting this evening. It is too late to send color printouts of the new layout via Federal Express. Currently, your only recourse is to send a FAX or to attempt to negotiate a document format that your client understands and that doesn't lose any of the layout that your expensive graphics software allows for (Pagemill, Illustrator, Corel?). Enter IPP. Your client contact simply gives you the url of a printer that is capable of printing your layout in acceptable quality, as well as the username & password to access the resource, OR, the client sends you the url of the high quality, high capacity color printer at the Kinko's across the street. Problem solved. Notice that you don't need to (a) know what kind of printer is printing your layout, only the capabilities of the printer are important. Also, (b) you didn't need to download drivers for the printer that you are using. These are *very* important useability issues.

All these things that I've tried to visualize for the readers of Slashdot represent only a fraction of the possibilities that IPP allows for.

I encourage you to read the IPP Model document as well as the Specifications and Implementers Guide for IPP.

If you'd like more information on my Senior project, feel free to visit this page.

Brice Ruth has written a response to the lengthy debates sparked a few days ago on these pages regarding the new Internet Printer Protocol. He has a lot to say, and from an informed position. You should check this out if you're interested in the issue- a lot of good information seperating fact from fiction. Hit the link below to read it. The following was written by Slashdot reader Brice Ruth A Response to the IPP

I just got through browsing through all the comments posted about CNN's IPP story. I thought I'd send you my thoughts on the matter, since I believe I'm in a rather unique position to talk about IPP. From June, 1998 through the end of February, 1999, I worked with 3 other classmates on a Senior Project sponsored by Xerox Corporation, mapping the current IPP 1.0 specification into a distributed object model, using Xerox' Inter Language Unification (ILU) system, which is Xerox' Palo Alto Research Center's CORBA like system.

(Here comes the disclaimer), the views that I've represented here are my views, they do not represent the views of Xerox, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology, any members of the Printer Working Group, or any members of my Senior Project team.

Why is IPP better than lpr, HP Jet-Admin, or any of the currently available printer solutions?

In all the discussion, one major point, I believe, has been missed. One of the major goals of the IPP projects is to eliminate the client's need for printer drivers. lpr needs drivers, HP Jet-Admin needs drivers (besides only working w/ HP printers :)), NT/win98/95, MacOS -> they all need drivers to communicate with printers. What IPP allows for is a communication between the client and the printer (or printer server, the two do NOT have to be the same), where the printer informs the client of its capabilitie. The client can then present these capabilities to the user who can select which of the capabilities ought to be used in printing the document. However - this isn't *required* ... a print job can be constructed and 'validated' against the particular printer you want to use, and the client can simply inform the user if the printer is capable of printing the document with the settings you've previously selected. I could go into many more example situations where this printer/client communication can be extremely useful, however - suffice it to say that the language is extensible, so the sky is the limit, in this sense.

What about security?

Whenever we hear about something being 'at large' on the Internet - security concerns are raised. Let me express my faith in the members of the Printer Working Group. I've personally met many of the individuals involved with developing the IPP specification and I've actually *read* the IPP specification (many, many, many times). The security that is built into this system, this *open standard* system, is very much better than anything we have now. And if there's a system out there that has BETTER security, please - contribute your knowledge to the standard, don't sit and whine about how IPP is going to be insecure and open to attacks. Any online system is open to attacks, just because a system exists. This doesn't mean the system ought to be rejected/abolished ... if this were our modus operandi, then we would close down the Internet, close down the phone systems, close down our utilities. All systems that are in use today are open to attack, in varying degrees. Security means limiting the degree to which a system is vulnerable to attack. Perfect security costs an infinite amount of $$ and is not feasible.

Is everything CNN said true?

Well, no - not exactly. Microsoft does not hold the key to the success of IPP - you do. We face a problem these days of trying to get another person to visualize what we've created, without being physically present to show them. The fact that we will be able to FAX in color isn't the *only* thing that IPP will allow us to do. Think about how FAXing (the *primary* means of communication for many large corporations) takes place today. Your FAX number is on your business card ... so, someone needs to send you some information ... your FAX number is busy, so they try again ... still busy. As some phone company commercials have touted, you're potentially losing business. Then ... how many times have you received an illegible FAX? I have. How many times has a FAX been misplaced on its way from the company FAX machine to your inbox? IPP is a new player in the field of communication that is an effort to address some of these major problems.

Imagine the following situation (which I've attempted to make somewhat realistic): you're an advertisement/marketing firm with a new layout for a magazine spread, for company X. As is always the case, the more time you have to work on this spread, the better it will be. Working up to the deadline is almost a certainty in the fast paced business world. If company X, your client, needs this spread for their board meeting this evening. It is too late to send color printouts of the new layout via Federal Express. Currently, your only recourse is to send a FAX or to attempt to negotiate a document format that your client understands and that doesn't lose any of the layout that your expensive graphics software allows for (Pagemill, Illustrator, Corel?). Enter IPP. Your client contact simply gives you the url of a printer that is capable of printing your layout in acceptable quality, as well as the username & password to access the resource, OR, the client sends you the url of the high quality, high capacity color printer at the Kinko's across the street. Problem solved. Notice that you don't need to (a) know what kind of printer is printing your layout, only the capabilities of the printer are important. Also, (b) you didn't need to download drivers for the printer that you are using. These are *very* important useability issues.

All these things that I've tried to visualize for the readers of Slashdot represent only a fraction of the possibilities that IPP allows for.

I encourage you to read the IPP Model document as well as the Specifications and Implementers Guide for IPP.

If you'd like more information on my Senior project, feel free to visit this page.

Slashdot reader Brice Ruth has this question:

Since installing RedHat 5.1, I've been trying to find any kind of help in running iBCS. I realize that a package for iBCS is preinstalled with RedHat 5.1 (kernel-ibcs...), however, all attempts at running SCO binaries have failed. I HAVE been able to figure out that the reason it is failing is because I don't have libraries for the binaries. Let me rephrase -- I DO have the libraries, since I have access to a perfectly legal copy of SCO OpenServer, however, I have no idea where to place them and what directory structure is necessary so that they are found, etc. Two things would be quite helpful in my quest:

1. a good page that tells me all these things that I need to do
   
2. someone who has successfully used iBCS and is relatively familiar with the process in both SCO and Solaris.

If you have a question you would like posted to Ask Slashdot, then please send them to me. I would like to start posting more questions on a regular basis since Ask Slashdot is now its own section.